Police tot up benefits of raid

WILTSHIRE Police began to add up the benefits of Operation Harness on Wednesday, as numbers for arrests and seizures began to filter through yesterday.

In addition to the results reported in yesterday’s Adver the police seized approximately £50,000 worth of illegal tobacco seized from an address in Melksham late on Wednesday night.

A large amount of class A drugs, £11,500 in cash, £65,000 illegal tobacco, over £5,000 in designer clothing/accessories, a samurai sword, a machete and electrical goods were all seized on Wednesday afternoon. Operational commander and dangerous drugs network lead for Wiltshire Police, Detective Chief Inspector Craig Holden, said: “This activity is just one of a number of tactics we use to disrupt and dismantle dangerous drugs networks across our county.

“As a result of this day of action alone, we anticipate that we have significantly disrupted or completely dismantled more than 15 of these networks operating in Swindon.

“Wiltshire Police has a dedicated team to specifically tackle these networks and we will relentlessly pursue those who are responsible for supplying drugs in our communities.

“We rely on local intelligence and I would urge anyone who has information or suspects that drugs are being sold or used in their neighbourhood to contact Wiltshire Police immediately.”

Operation Harness is a long-term collaborative project involving all police officers and staff over a number of organised days of action throughout the year.

Anyone wishing to report suspected drug use or dealing in their area should contact Wiltshire Police on 101 or Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.

The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.

Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.
The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.dukeofM4

dukeofM4 wrote:
Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.

The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.

Wow aren't we a bundle of laughs today. So basically you are saying if the war on illegal drugs is being lost we should just give up and give in to them and legalise it? The same could be said about burglary with the number actually caught and sentenced so should we legalise that too?

[quote][p][bold]dukeofM4[/bold] wrote:
Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.
The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.[/p][/quote]Wow aren't we a bundle of laughs today. So basically you are saying if the war on illegal drugs is being lost we should just give up and give in to them and legalise it? The same could be said about burglary with the number actually caught and sentenced so should we legalise that too?house on the hill

dukeofM4 wrote:
Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.

The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.

Wow aren't we a bundle of laughs today. So basically you are saying if the war on illegal drugs is being lost we should just give up and give in to them and legalise it? The same could be said about burglary with the number actually caught and sentenced so should we legalise that too?

If you can't see a difference between drug taking (victimless) and burglary (victim(s)), then you've no place in this conversation.

[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]dukeofM4[/bold] wrote:
Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.
The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.[/p][/quote]Wow aren't we a bundle of laughs today. So basically you are saying if the war on illegal drugs is being lost we should just give up and give in to them and legalise it? The same could be said about burglary with the number actually caught and sentenced so should we legalise that too?[/p][/quote]If you can't see a difference between drug taking (victimless) and burglary (victim(s)), then you've no place in this conversation.benzss

Unfortunately we lost the battle against illegal drugs in the early 19th Century starting with opiates and have continued to lose the war right up until current times.

Drugs have become a currency throughout our society escalated by certain ethic cultures and popularised by many on the pop music scene that have influenced so many and have almost made the so called 'soft drugs' acceptable to many.

Operation Julie took the majority of LSD off our Streets in the 1970's but then other more popular drugs took their place - Operation Julie was massively more large scale that this local little raid despite what the Police propaganda may indicate - Can't see this raid producing a best selling book.

World Governments do not have an answer to the problem but I would see legalisation as one possible answer - but what would all the violent organised gangs do to supplement their incomes?

There are insufficient penalties available and society has become too soft so I am afraid unless that changes we will just have to accept all this and the Police will occasionally do a swoop to catch just the soft tip of a very large iceberg.

Unfortunately we lost the battle against illegal drugs in the early 19th Century starting with opiates and have continued to lose the war right up until current times.
Drugs have become a currency throughout our society escalated by certain ethic cultures and popularised by many on the pop music scene that have influenced so many and have almost made the so called 'soft drugs' acceptable to many.
Operation Julie took the majority of LSD off our Streets in the 1970's but then other more popular drugs took their place - Operation Julie was massively more large scale that this local little raid despite what the Police propaganda may indicate - Can't see this raid producing a best selling book.
World Governments do not have an answer to the problem but I would see legalisation as one possible answer - but what would all the violent organised gangs do to supplement their incomes?
There are insufficient penalties available and society has become too soft so I am afraid unless that changes we will just have to accept all this and the Police will occasionally do a swoop to catch just the soft tip of a very large iceberg.House with no name

dukeofM4 wrote:
Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.

The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.

Wow aren't we a bundle of laughs today. So basically you are saying if the war on illegal drugs is being lost we should just give up and give in to them and legalise it? The same could be said about burglary with the number actually caught and sentenced so should we legalise that too?

If you can't see a difference between drug taking (victimless) and burglary (victim(s)), then you've no place in this conversation.

Unfortunately the majority of burglaries are committed by drug addicts to fund their addiction. Drug abuse is not victimless, users account for the greatest amount of acquisitive crime from shoplifting to burglaries, bike thefts etc etc etc. you might even argue that that's just the hard stuff like heroin and crack cocaine, however cannabis has just an impact. Look at several of the teens from swindon who have appeared in the adver over the last year, committing burglaries to fund a cannabis habit. You caould also look at the cannabis factories where Vietnamese immigrants were held, passports taken after being trafficked into the country, stripped naked, beaten, tortured and forced to work cultivating the crop for organised criminals... This actually happens in swindon and not somewhere in fantasy land.

I haven't even covered prostitution, car crime, gang related violence an. Antisocial behaviour but I'm sure you get the point.......

So to say drugs are victimless is one of the most inaccurate and naive comments someone could make.

[quote][p][bold]benzss[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]dukeofM4[/bold] wrote:
Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.
The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.[/p][/quote]Wow aren't we a bundle of laughs today. So basically you are saying if the war on illegal drugs is being lost we should just give up and give in to them and legalise it? The same could be said about burglary with the number actually caught and sentenced so should we legalise that too?[/p][/quote]If you can't see a difference between drug taking (victimless) and burglary (victim(s)), then you've no place in this conversation.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately the majority of burglaries are committed by drug addicts to fund their addiction. Drug abuse is not victimless, users account for the greatest amount of acquisitive crime from shoplifting to burglaries, bike thefts etc etc etc. you might even argue that that's just the hard stuff like heroin and crack cocaine, however cannabis has just an impact. Look at several of the teens from swindon who have appeared in the adver over the last year, committing burglaries to fund a cannabis habit. You caould also look at the cannabis factories where Vietnamese immigrants were held, passports taken after being trafficked into the country, stripped naked, beaten, tortured and forced to work cultivating the crop for organised criminals... This actually happens in swindon and not somewhere in fantasy land.
I haven't even covered prostitution, car crime, gang related violence an. Antisocial behaviour but I'm sure you get the point.......
So to say drugs are victimless is one of the most inaccurate and naive comments someone could make.goodgolly

dukeofM4 wrote:
Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.

The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.

Wow aren't we a bundle of laughs today. So basically you are saying if the war on illegal drugs is being lost we should just give up and give in to them and legalise it? The same could be said about burglary with the number actually caught and sentenced so should we legalise that too?

If you can't see a difference between drug taking (victimless) and burglary (victim(s)), then you've no place in this conversation.

Unfortunately the majority of burglaries are committed by drug addicts to fund their addiction. Drug abuse is not victimless, users account for the greatest amount of acquisitive crime from shoplifting to burglaries, bike thefts etc etc etc. you might even argue that that's just the hard stuff like heroin and crack cocaine, however cannabis has just an impact. Look at several of the teens from swindon who have appeared in the adver over the last year, committing burglaries to fund a cannabis habit. You caould also look at the cannabis factories where Vietnamese immigrants were held, passports taken after being trafficked into the country, stripped naked, beaten, tortured and forced to work cultivating the crop for organised criminals... This actually happens in swindon and not somewhere in fantasy land.

I haven't even covered prostitution, car crime, gang related violence an. Antisocial behaviour but I'm sure you get the point.......

So to say drugs are victimless is one of the most inaccurate and naive comments someone could make.

Drug use per se is a victimless crime; the act of taking drugs affects nobody except yourself.

The effects of drug taking are seen everywhere, this is true. Every Friday night in every provincial town in the country shows you the effects one particular drug can have on many people. Would banning this drug reduce criminality (i.e. where there is a victim)? Well, luckily we have an example from the early C20th which shows that, no, it won't reduce crime, and may even make things worse. Perhaps we can also apply this lesson to other drugs? Just a thought.

Many of the crimes you mention there are a direct result of illegality, you know. The supply chain stuff involving violent gangs and corrupt bureaucrats only exists because people like you don't think far enough ahead, then have the gall to call people like me naive.

[quote][p][bold]goodgolly[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]benzss[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]dukeofM4[/bold] wrote:
Why don't the Police tot up the long term benefit of their operation? Zero.
The only winner is the Treasury getting short term relief from loss tax revenue before organised crime sees there's a gap in the market that needs to be filled in Swindon.[/p][/quote]Wow aren't we a bundle of laughs today. So basically you are saying if the war on illegal drugs is being lost we should just give up and give in to them and legalise it? The same could be said about burglary with the number actually caught and sentenced so should we legalise that too?[/p][/quote]If you can't see a difference between drug taking (victimless) and burglary (victim(s)), then you've no place in this conversation.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately the majority of burglaries are committed by drug addicts to fund their addiction. Drug abuse is not victimless, users account for the greatest amount of acquisitive crime from shoplifting to burglaries, bike thefts etc etc etc. you might even argue that that's just the hard stuff like heroin and crack cocaine, however cannabis has just an impact. Look at several of the teens from swindon who have appeared in the adver over the last year, committing burglaries to fund a cannabis habit. You caould also look at the cannabis factories where Vietnamese immigrants were held, passports taken after being trafficked into the country, stripped naked, beaten, tortured and forced to work cultivating the crop for organised criminals... This actually happens in swindon and not somewhere in fantasy land.
I haven't even covered prostitution, car crime, gang related violence an. Antisocial behaviour but I'm sure you get the point.......
So to say drugs are victimless is one of the most inaccurate and naive comments someone could make.[/p][/quote]Drug use per se is a victimless crime; the act of taking drugs affects nobody except yourself.
The effects of drug taking are seen everywhere, this is true. Every Friday night in every provincial town in the country shows you the effects one particular drug can have on many people. Would banning this drug reduce criminality (i.e. where there is a victim)? Well, luckily we have an example from the early C20th which shows that, no, it won't reduce crime, and may even make things worse. Perhaps we can also apply this lesson to other drugs? Just a thought.
Many of the crimes you mention there are a direct result of illegality, you know. The supply chain stuff involving violent gangs and corrupt bureaucrats only exists because people like you don't think far enough ahead, then have the gall to call people like me naive.benzss

We're losing sight of one important fact. These guys are in it for the money, it's a tax free business. In some ways they're no worse than tobacco companies. Tobacco companies cause 1/3 of all cancers, not to mention other smoking related diseases. But nobody is putting them out of business because HM Treasury would lose a lot of money to Al Capone if they took the same approach as drugs.

I'm not saying legalise everything, but we certainly could take more of Al's business away from him and tax it. The UK should watch Colorado and what's happening there. They're taxing cannabis it to raise money rather than give it to Al.

Al controls the whole things. The supply, the price, and pays zero taxes.

Ask yourself one question? How much did a 1 year long police action cost vs the tax revenue gained in that photograph? The cost of the 1 year police action cost far more than some guy peddling fags from Latvia.

We're losing sight of one important fact. These guys are in it for the money, it's a tax free business. In some ways they're no worse than tobacco companies. Tobacco companies cause 1/3 of all cancers, not to mention other smoking related diseases. But nobody is putting them out of business because HM Treasury would lose a lot of money to Al Capone if they took the same approach as drugs.
I'm not saying legalise everything, but we certainly could take more of Al's business away from him and tax it. The UK should watch Colorado and what's happening there. They're taxing cannabis it to raise money rather than give it to Al.
Al controls the whole things. The supply, the price, and pays zero taxes.
Ask yourself one question? How much did a 1 year long police action cost vs the tax revenue gained in that photograph? The cost of the 1 year police action cost far more than some guy peddling fags from Latvia.dukeofM4